Talk:Finetooth shark/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hi, I have reviewed this article for GA and have made some copy edits. Please feel free to revert any copy edits with which you do not agree. I think this is a fine article and fulfills the GA criteria. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 18:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC) GA review (see here for criteria)

Another good article by you. Congratulations!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Well written b (MoS): follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers major areas b (focused): Remains focused on topic and presents in context
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 18:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)